10 minutes in he sounds like Ronald MS Commers*. So that you can underspecify what the program does and itll figure out all the types. But it doesnt always go right. And so if it is trying to solve your program, and it finds an inconsistency. It stops. And you get this completely opaque message, which is indicating that it found an inconsistency that is actually miles away from where the message actually is. [...] And once its done, theres a folklore which says, having gone through that ringer, youre guaranteed: Your program is going to be error-free. And it turns out: Its not. That there are subtle errors [that happen in Haskell], as happen in all other languages (!). And the type system actually gives you no leverage in dealing with that stuff. [Theres just...] Stuff gets complicated. And where theres complexity, things go wrong. And that happens in all languages youtu.be/b0EF0VTs9Dc Its like listening to somebody repeating Ronald MS Commers, repeating Bertrand Russel, repeating Leibniz; but with a programming language as a concrete example. Maybe I shall reread Russel on Leibniz as Commmers (and Russel in his intro, which Commers also seemed to have memorized verbatim as his own seemingly radical and not mainstream opinion) suggested.
Posted on: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 21:42:39 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015